Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2021/02/23 16:07:48
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Not Online!!! wrote: Sure buddy, whatevs, doesn't change the fact that canadian is probably a lot more out of touch than insectum in regards to the game state atm.
Except that we were talking 3e and not 9e, do try to keep up...
Insectum7 wrote: A: There's no way you're going to convince me that I was bad at the game or playing Necrons wrong.
Would you be up for a game using the rules and armies from 3rd or 4th edition then? You can bring anything you like from the Necron codex and I'll play 3e Blood Angels. If we go to 4e I'll pick Orks or Tyranids, I think we can agree that none of these picks are anything especially cheesy.
B: The majority of players don't play tournaments and play in local metas of various sorts, so arguably an army's play for local metas is more important than tournies.
Yes and no. Yes, they are where the most games are played, but they're also played by people who often have limited lists, experience, and skill whereas a top 8 or even top 16 at a large tournament will vastly narrow all of those gaps.
Insectum7 wrote: Because it represents a degradation of the unit over time. Originally they were 50% more expensive than an Astartes, and each one represented an undying killing machine that was more than a match for a Space Marine. Now you're saying that 2:1vs Astartes is fine. That's a serious reduction.
Isn't that perfectly thematic for Necrons in literally any incarnation of their fluff?
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/02/23 16:23:02
2021/02/23 16:43:18
Subject: Re:If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, i've always kind of liked necron warriors as kind of a shambling, broken down horde that isn't particularly flexible or adaptable but can batter down elite units by sheer force of numbers, so I don't have any serious problem with them being approximately 2 to 1 vs astartes. They're still a cut above every 'horde' type unit in the game, and equivalent to many factions' elites.
Because it represents a degradation of the unit over time. Originally they were 50% more expensive than an Astartes, and each one represented an undying killing machine that was more than a match for a Space Marine. Now you're saying that 2:1vs Astartes is fine. That's a serious reduction.
Yeah I know, I played with the 3rd ed codex for quite a while. it always felt like a gimmick that was kind of interesting on paper - the idea that they don't really have good efficient specialist units because they just plow through them brute-force with their inexorable gauss weaponry and super-defenses - but in practice I found it pretty boring, and I'd like to be able to field my big horde of mindless cyborg warriors AND some specialist stuff that's good at killing tanks and elites and whatnot.
What that means practically is the warriors need to be less points so they don't make up 100% of my army. I'm aware that means their quality degrades WRT Astartes.
Taking Harlequins as another example, the same sort of thing happened. In order to add in bikes and HQs as characters instead of just glorified sergeants and vehicles, Harlequins went from a hyper-elite unit way better than marines to a unit about on par with basic marines and worse than marine elites.
That seems OK to me, a person who wants to field an army of Harlequins and not just like 15 of them.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2021/02/23 16:50:29
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Exactly. As they are now, Warriors allow necron players to play a necron horde AND some of the more interesting stuff that they have gained in the past 20 years.
If you want that old warrior terminator fell you can spam Inmortals with support characters and I'll asure you, you'll feel the same. Put a blob of inmortals agaisnt a blob of space marine troop infantry and they'll shredd them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/23 16:50:50
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2021/02/23 17:00:18
Subject: Re:If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, i've always kind of liked necron warriors as kind of a shambling, broken down horde that isn't particularly flexible or adaptable but can batter down elite units by sheer force of numbers, so I don't have any serious problem with them being approximately 2 to 1 vs astartes. They're still a cut above every 'horde' type unit in the game, and equivalent to many factions' elites.
Because it represents a degradation of the unit over time. Originally they were 50% more expensive than an Astartes, and each one represented an undying killing machine that was more than a match for a Space Marine. Now you're saying that 2:1vs Astartes is fine. That's a serious reduction.
Yeah I know, I played with the 3rd ed codex for quite a while. it always felt like a gimmick that was kind of interesting on paper - the idea that they don't really have good efficient specialist units because they just plow through them brute-force with their inexorable gauss weaponry and super-defenses - but in practice I found it pretty boring, and I'd like to be able to field my big horde of mindless cyborg warriors AND some specialist stuff that's good at killing tanks and elites and whatnot.
What that means practically is the warriors need to be less points so they don't make up 100% of my army. I'm aware that means their quality degrades WRT Astartes.
Taking Harlequins as another example, the same sort of thing happened. In order to add in bikes and HQs as characters instead of just glorified sergeants and vehicles, Harlequins went from a hyper-elite unit way better than marines to a unit about on par with basic marines and worse than marine elites.
That seems OK to me, a person who wants to field an army of Harlequins and not just like 15 of them.
Well I'd certainly disagree about there being no specialists. Immortals, Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers were all fantastic shooting units. Wraiths were good against high AP units and Flayed Ones shredded hordes in cc pretty well. Pariahs were the big CC hitter unit, but unfortunately they had a few downsides that made them hard to take.
I agree that a tempting way to run 3rd ed Crons was to run low S Gauss and tank it out, but it wasn't really necessary to go full out in that regard.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote: Exactly. As they are now, Warriors allow necron players to play a necron horde AND some of the more interesting stuff that they have gained in the past 20 years.
If you want that old warrior terminator fell you can spam Inmortals with support characters and I'll asure you, you'll feel the same. Put a blob of inmortals agaisnt a blob of space marine troop infantry and they'll shredd them.
Accepting Immortals as the new/old Warrior . . .the thing is, there's not really a replacement for the 3rd ed Immortals, which were nearly double the cost of a Marine.
Not to mention the speed reductions for the Destroyers and Wraiths (iirc) as well. The older Crons had a speed that the new ones don't.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/23 17:02:51
I can agree that Necron Praetorians and Lychguard could probably be tougther and more scary. I mean, they are really scary, but when compared with marine terminators they aren't that scary.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2021/02/23 17:51:12
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Galas wrote:I really don't understand the obsesion with warriors when Inmortals should be the elite necron troop.
It dates back to when their first codex was released in 3rd Ed, and which lasted till almost the end of 5th Ed.
Warriors were the only Troop unit and Immortals were Elites. Even though Warriors were the most basic Necron Infantry unit, they still cost a little bit more than the most basic Tactical Marine and were more durable.
On the other hand, a Necron player was almost forced to put out as many Warriors as his list could tolerate because of a little thing called Phase Out which encouraged the Necron Player to not just put 20 Warriors out there and fill up their FOC with some really power units. Phase Out would trigger when 75% of the Necron models (which excluded the Scarabs, C'Tan, Spyder, and Monolith) were removed as casualties (and had a chance to use We'll Be Back). Warriors had the biggest unit size, access to the most FOC slots, and were the cheapest Necron models, thus encouraging putting out a horde of Warriors.
This went away in 5th edition when more Elite units were included, Immortals moved to Troops, and they tossed out the Phase Out rule. Immortals and Warriors both saw a downgrade to a stat or two and were reduced in price point. With these stat downgrades, their power in relation to Tactical Marines saw a drop (not that it hadn't dropped earlier with Chapter Tactics in 4th and free Grenades in 5th). In the latest round of Codices, Tactical Marines received a noticeable boost to durability (to say nothing about all the other crap added on since 5th) and Warriors were basically left alone. This removes that sense of foreboding power that the weakest of Necron Infantry could go toe to toe with a Tactical Marine to just become mook of the week.
Galas wrote:If you make necron warriors new inmortals and inmortals super inmortals you remove the option for people to play different styles of armies.
Actually not quite. Necrons were never (initially) meant to really be a horde army. They were to bring a core group of unrelenting, unstoppable troops. They just appeared as a horde because the more specialists you brought, the easier it was to create an auto-lose for the Necron Player.
Sure, one could present a horde of Warriors far easier and more desired than a horde of Astartes (those upgrades did add up) or Immortals, but Warriors were never (initially) meant to be brought in the same numbers as Boyz, Guardsmen, or Bugs, or even as cheap as Fire Warriors.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/23 18:33:34
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Galas wrote:I really don't understand the obsesion with warriors when Inmortals should be the elite necron troop.
It dates back to when their first codex was released in 3rd Ed, and which lasted till almost the end of 5th Ed.
Warriors were the only Troop unit and Immortals were Elites. Even though Warriors were the most basic Necron Infantry unit, they still cost a little bit more than the most basic Tactical Marine and were more durable.
Technically a few years prior to that, the first 3rd Ed Necron list was released in 1999 in White Dwarf.
@Galas: When Warriors were first introduced in 2nd Ed they were T5 2+ sv with some other nasty goodies, compared to a Marines T4 3+.
Originally Warriors were the T800 to the Marine as Kyle Reece. Now I wouldn't say we should go back to that level, but it should give you more context to see how far they've fallen.
Galas wrote:I really don't understand the obsesion with warriors when Inmortals should be the elite necron troop.
It dates back to when their first codex was released in 3rd Ed, and which lasted till almost the end of 5th Ed.
Warriors were the only Troop unit and Immortals were Elites. Even though Warriors were the most basic Necron Infantry unit, they still cost a little bit more than the most basic Tactical Marine and were more durable.
Technically a few years prior to that, the first 3rd Ed Necron list was released in 1999 in White Dwarf.
@Galas: When Warriors were first introduced in 2nd Ed they were T5 2+ sv with some other nasty goodies, compared to a Marines T4 3+.
Originally Warriors were the T800 to the Marine as Kyle Reece. Now I wouldn't say we should go back to that level, but it should give you more context to see how far they've fallen.
Well, the 3rd Edition codex was the last time that Immortals and Warriors were in separate FOC slots.
And I couldn't remember if Immortals were available in the White Dwarf, but it looks like Warriors weren't. The Raiders were the Warrior equivalent back then.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/23 19:19:31
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Galas wrote:I really don't understand the obsesion with warriors when Inmortals should be the elite necron troop.
It dates back to when their first codex was released in 3rd Ed, and which lasted till almost the end of 5th Ed.
Warriors were the only Troop unit and Immortals were Elites. Even though Warriors were the most basic Necron Infantry unit, they still cost a little bit more than the most basic Tactical Marine and were more durable.
Technically a few years prior to that, the first 3rd Ed Necron list was released in 1999 in White Dwarf.
@Galas: When Warriors were first introduced in 2nd Ed they were T5 2+ sv with some other nasty goodies, compared to a Marines T4 3+.
Originally Warriors were the T800 to the Marine as Kyle Reece. Now I wouldn't say we should go back to that level, but it should give you more context to see how far they've fallen.
Well, the 3rd Edition codex was the last time that Immortals and Warriors were in separate FOC slots.
And I couldn't remember if Immortals were available in the White Dwarf, but it looks like Warriors weren't. The Raiders were the Warrior equivalent back then.
Timeline is this:
1997 - White Dwarf 217 (January) - Warriors and Scarabs are released.
1997 - White Dwarf 218 (February) - Lords and Destroyers are released.
1998 - 3rd Ed released
1999 - White Dwarf 230 (March) - 3rd Ed Necron Army list. Lord, Warriors, Immortals, Destroyers and Scarabs. Warriors, Immortals and Destroyers* are nearly identical to their subsequent codex release, points and all, except that they have access to Gauss Grenades rather than Disruption Fields (although I think they do the same thing). Gauss Weapons Glance on 6s but no auto-wound-6s like the codex.
- - - - - Scarabs are still the little single model guys at 6ppm.
- - - - - 4+ WBB, 25% Phase Out are in.
- - - - - *Destroyers can upgrade one model with a Heavy Gauss Cannon, which is S9 AP3 rather than the later AP2
Insectum7 wrote: A: There's no way you're going to convince me that I was bad at the game or playing Necrons wrong.
Would you be up for a game using the rules and armies from 3rd or 4th edition then? You can bring anything you like from the Necron codex and I'll play 3e Blood Angels. If we go to 4e I'll pick Orks or Tyranids, I think we can agree that none of these picks are anything especially cheesy.
I'd play against anything, but you must remember that the 3e BA books was probably the most loathed book at the time, with their potential 30"+ first turn charges, etc. I had some great games vs. Nids and Orks* in 4th. I do note you're picking fast-assault armies.
*Orks or Speed Freaks, lol.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/23 19:23:46
Insectum7 wrote: I'd play against anything, but you must remember that the 3e BA books was probably the most loathed book at the time, with their potential 30"+ first turn charges, etc. I had some great games vs. Nids and Orks* in 4th. I do note you're picking fast-assault armies.
*Orks or Speed Freaks, lol.
I'd heard that about BA but it wasn't a list I've ever tested, so I was curious as to how it would actually play. I also wanted to pick solid lists but purposely avoided 3.5 Chaos even though that's the one army of the 3 I actually own models for.
The Nids were probably going to be more shooting focused built around a pair of Flyrants (Wings, Double Devourers, Toxin Sacs, Enhanced Senses, Warp Field) backed by Steelers, Zoanthropes, 2x Crushing Claws/Scything Talons Fexes, and a Twin Venom Cannon Fex. I'd have to see how the points work out but I feel like has a lot of answers to nearly any list. I might also have looked at what J2Y was running back then, if he was, and try that list.
The Orks would have probably been the Deffrolla Wagons tanking shocking things so their embarked Burna Boyz could roast them list with Loota support. I'd probably just copy Dash of Pepper's old Ork lists and see if I can pilot them as well as he did.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/23 20:03:12
2021/02/23 20:06:31
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
I'd heard that about BA but it wasn't a list I've ever tested, so I was curious as to how it would actually play. I also wanted to pick solid lists but purposely avoided 3.5 Chaos even though that's the one army of the 3 I actually own models for.
^I'd be happy to play against Chaos 3.5. Loved that book. (and played against it alot with my Crons).
But hold up . . . you were giving me crap about not having competitive knowledge yet you're unfamiliar with 3rd ed BA? That speaks volumes, imo.
Insectum7 wrote: ^I'd be happy to play against Chaos 3.5. Loved that book. (and played against it alot with my Crons).
But hold up . . . you were giving me crap about not having competitive knowledge yet you're unfamiliar with 3rd ed BA? That speaks volumes, imo.
I'm aware that BA Rhino rush was a bugbear back then, it's just a list I'm less familiar with than others. My time with 40k started around when Chaos 3.5 was out so I may have just missed seeing the full extent of what a rushed forward melee list could do. The same way that I never saw Eldar skimmers abused in person even though I know that was a major issue.
2021/02/23 21:50:15
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Galas wrote:Exactly. As they are now, Warriors allow necron players to play a necron horde AND some of the more interesting stuff that they have gained in the past 20 years.
If you want that old warrior terminator fell you can spam Inmortals with support characters and I'll asure you, you'll feel the same. Put a blob of inmortals agaisnt a blob of space marine troop infantry and they'll shredd them.
Galas wrote:I can agree that Necron Praetorians and Lychguard could probably be tougther and more scary. I mean, they are really scary, but when compared with marine terminators they aren't that scary.
This is 100% where I am at right now. I really like where the Necron Warriors are right now. They've got better weapons that standard Tac marines, and the ability to get back up consistently while being cheap enough to bring as a horde. If I want a more elite style, I'll bring Warriors which feels much like the old playstyle in 4th did.
I do agree that I wish Lychguard and Praetorians were a bit tougher like Terminators
I figure those >=4 points are "You included an absurd option on a poll and expected people not to click on it for laughs."
In fact...
"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"
-Tex Talks Battletech on GW
2021/02/24 14:49:54
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Insectum7 wrote: The thing is you could build them as a horde even when they were more ppm than a marine.
The thing is you pretty much had to in order to prevent Phase Out. They were the cheapest Necron model that you could horde with at the time.
Only sorta. I ran armies running from 50 to 80 at the time.
Back in 3rd/4th once the original Codex arrived I typically ran 25 or so. I'd calculate my phase out # & put a single squad of that # out of LoS, in cover far in my backfield & leave them there. Generally worked well enough. Their only job was to exist.
Various mixes, but Immortals & Destroyers were my workhorse units. Sometimes a Monolith would make an appearance.
2021/02/24 16:43:45
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Insectum7 wrote: The thing is you could build them as a horde even when they were more ppm than a marine.
The thing is you pretty much had to in order to prevent Phase Out. They were the cheapest Necron model that you could horde with at the time.
Only sorta. I ran armies running from 50 to 80 at the time.
Back in 3rd/4th once the original Codex arrived I typically ran 25 or so. I'd calculate my phase out # & put a single squad of that # out of LoS, in cover far in my backfield & leave them there. Generally worked well enough. Their only job was to exist.
Various mixes, but Immortals & Destroyers were my workhorse units. Sometimes a Monolith would make an appearance.
Which didn't help against Infiltrators, Deep Strikers, or quick units who could get past all that because they were some of the easier models to kill (note: "easier" does not always mean "easy").
Still this demonstrates more that the Necron Warriors were the best unit for padding out against Phase Out, especially since you had to take two units of them any way.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2021/02/24 19:17:38
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
A space marine has never truely lived up to its proper power level on the table in any eddition I have played. Except in 5th eddtion there were some special army rule which allowed them to do well (Salamanders/BA/SW) I dont recall necrons at the time then but they couldn't have been great with no one really playing them. In 7th they were basically equal in power with a marine being harder to put down (not saying much) but the warrior having a much more useful weapon and being a bit cheaper with a lower initiative. When the super formations came out - they were - essentially equal.
The decision to make mini marines 2 wounds was a strange one but one that should have been there all along. A marine should be drastically better on the table than a warrior (which is essentially an undead citizen robot soul) A marine is literally a hyper specialized killing machine.
Whats funny is - I think this eddition is the first eddition to get the dynamic right. The Warriors edge if it has one should be technology and it should be deficient to a marine in several other ways. Finally they have got it right.
Then when we get to the elite troop level. Primaris marines/Immortals...yet again - we have the same discrepancy. The marine has a slight edge in both melee and overall durability but inferior tech - worse gun and worse ability to repair battle damage.
Galas wrote:Exactly. As they are now, Warriors allow necron players to play a necron horde AND some of the more interesting stuff that they have gained in the past 20 years.
If you want that old warrior terminator fell you can spam Inmortals with support characters and I'll asure you, you'll feel the same. Put a blob of inmortals agaisnt a blob of space marine troop infantry and they'll shredd them.
Galas wrote:I can agree that Necron Praetorians and Lychguard could probably be tougther and more scary. I mean, they are really scary, but when compared with marine terminators they aren't that scary.
This is 100% where I am at right now. I really like where the Necron Warriors are right now. They've got better weapons that standard Tac marines, and the ability to get back up consistently while being cheap enough to bring as a horde. If I want a more elite style, I'll bring Warriors which feels much like the old playstyle in 4th did.
I do agree that I wish Lychguard and Praetorians were a bit tougher like Terminators
They are T5 Str 5. Terms are 4/4. Just have 3 wounds instead of 2. Terms also have 1 less attack. The only place the lych/pretorians are lacking is in their weapons - they don't have the option for str 8 attacks.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/24 19:22:37
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2021/02/24 19:27:35
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Xenomancers wrote: A space marine has never truely lived up to its proper power level on the table in any eddition I have played.
See, what they don't tell you is that in a novel the author gets to decide the dice results, which is why protagonists always roll 6s and mooks always roll 1s.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/24 19:28:18
2021/02/24 19:36:59
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Xenomancers wrote: A space marine has never truely lived up to its proper power level on the table in any eddition I have played.
See, what they don't tell you is that in a novel the author gets to decide the dice results, which is why protagonists always roll 6s and mooks always roll 1s.
Yeah I'm not big on trying to make anything equal to how it's depicted in the books. Art on the other hand. I wish my reivers were as awesome as the SW one that just grabs the fire warriors gun from him
2021/02/24 20:24:29
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
A Space Marine has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super soldiers who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Necron Warrior or Aspect Warrior man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
A Necron Warrior has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super unstoppable ancient alien robots who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Marine or Aspect Warrior man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
An Aspect Warrior has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super elite beyond-Eldar warrior monks who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Necron Warrior or Marine man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
Am I forgetting anyone else?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/24 20:25:13
2021/02/24 20:34:57
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Bharring wrote: A Space Marine has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super soldiers who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Necron Warrior or Aspect Warrior man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
A Necron Warrior has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super unstoppable ancient alien robots who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Marine or Aspect Warrior man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
An Aspect Warrior has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super elite beyond-Eldar warrior monks who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Necron Warrior or Marine man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
Am I forgetting anyone else?
+3
Orks, Daemons, Pulse Rifles . . . you name it.
The overall issue I see is that Space Marine fluff is a lot more abundant, therefore that's the perspective that's been taking over the balance on the tabletop. Two decades of Black Library rah-rah Speesh Mahreeens is leaving it's mark.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/24 20:43:59
If I was able to full rewrite the system, I'd probably swap toughness and armor around conceptually. Armor being something your weapons strength may not be high enough to penetrate. Toughness would be the saving through that represents your ability to shrug off damage, and wounds basically serving as the ability to survive mortal damage.
2021/02/24 22:03:20
Subject: If Marines Are Properly Costed At 20 Points, How Many Points Should A Necron Warrior Be?
Bharring wrote: A Space Marine has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super soldiers who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Necron Warrior or Aspect Warrior man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
A Necron Warrior has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super unstoppable ancient alien robots who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Marine or Aspect Warrior man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
An Aspect Warrior has never lived up to it's power level in the fluff. They're super elite beyond-Eldar warrior monks who should eat any other soldier for breakfast. Heck, for 6th/7th, they barely matched the Necron Warrior or Marine man-for-man. Clearly wrong.
Am I forgetting anyone else?
+3
Orks, Daemons, Pulse Rifles . . . you name it.
The overall issue I see is that Space Marine fluff is a lot more abundant, therefore that's the perspective that's been taking over the balance on the tabletop. Two decades of Black Library rah-rah Speesh Mahreeens is leaving it's mark.
Again, bolter porn. What was that one book where the arch arsonist gutted the crimson fists but someone didn't manage to take over the world even though they killed a fethload of marines early on. Apparently less than a single chapter of Marines can take on a Waaagh by itself
I answered 21-24pts, but closer to the 21pt side than the 24pt side. Necron Warriors should be slightly better than an Intercessor overall. Worse in Melee, but far more durable after taking Reanimation Protocols into account.
It also feels weird that a Bolt Rifle is better than the far more advanced Gauss Flayer, but I can live with it under the assumption that the "Rapid Fire" of a Bolt Rifle represents a hail of shots in rapid bursts with little down time while the "Rapid Fire" of the Flayer represents a couple of solid shots with a much longer firing/cooling time.
Exactly what the stats/rules should look like to represent this is another question entirely. Initiative not existing leaves very little to work with when it comes to make a Warrior worse in melee than an Intercessor or a Tactical Marine. You could represent something similar with an "Always Strike Last" type of rule (like how Daemonettes and other Slaanesh Daemons got an "Always Strikes First" rule to represent their high initiative), but it might just be cleaner to nerf their Weapon Skill to a 4+.
Maybe something like this? Save could be boosted to a 3+ like the good old days, but with the additional granularity of more wounds I'm fine with it being a 4+.
Mv 5" | WS 4+ | BS 3+ | S 4 | T 4 | W 2 | A 1 | Ld 10 | Sv 4+
Reanimation Protocols: If this unit is destroyed, do not remove the last model of it from the battlefield; leave it in place to mark the unit’s position (the model and unit is still counted as destroyed for other rule purposes).
At the end of every phase except for the Morale phase, roll a D6 for every wound this unit lost that phase. For each roll of a 5+, restore a lost wound to the unit. If all models in the unit have full wounds, instead resurrect a model that died earlier in the phase with 1 wound remaining. (Resurrected models are placed following the current rules)
If this unit was destroyed, the model marking the unit's position must be resurrected first with 1 wound remaining using the first 5+ rolled. If no rolls of a 5+ were successfully made, remove the marker model from the battlefield - the unit is permanently destroyed.
Phase Out: Subtract 1 from Combat Attrition tests if the unit is below Half-strength.
Gauss Flayer: Range 24" | Rapid Fire | S 4 | AP -1 | D 1
This is all obviously 100% off the top of my head and as such is probably wildly imbalanced and definitely poorly worded. I tried to capture some of the old feeling of We'll Be Back had at the same time, but maybe it'd be better for the game if it used the currect Resurrection Protocols as the base, just with rolling dice based on lost wounds to restore them (with excess ressurrecting models as required).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/26 03:42:50
4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
